What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by a CBDT circular. Consequently, the Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) passed an order for assessment year 2014-15. The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court challenging the ITAT's decision regarding the taxability of sale consideration of a property.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT was correct in holding the sale consideration taxable in a later year, and whether the appeal should be withdrawn due to falling below the monetary limit.

PCIT vs Ms. Sai Kiran Thakur | Karnataka High Court 2025

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9343-DB ITA No. 100022 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.100022 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAVANAGAR, HUBLI.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA. - APPELLANTS (BY SRI. THIRUMALESH M.M. AND SMT. ROOPA R.A., ADVOCATES)

AND: MS. SAI KIRAN THAKUR 180, GURUWAR PETH, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI-590001. [PAN: ACXPT9822E] - RESPONDENT (BY SRI. KUSHAL V. BOLMAL, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED U/S 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI IN IT(SS)A NO.32/PAN/2018 DATED 05.05.2022 FOR THE A.Y 2014-15 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND CONFIRM THE ORDER DATED 30.12.2016 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AS ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-C & ETC.

THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL

RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.08.04 11:44:56 +0530

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9343-DB ITA No. 100022 of 2023

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV)

The appeal has been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act challenging the order passed in I.T. (S.S) A. No. 32/PAN/2018 relating to assessment year 2014-15. It is noticed that the tax effect in the appeal in terms of the memo dated 29.07.2025 is Rs.131,04,039/-, raising the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether, on the fact and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in holding that, the sale consideration of the property was taxable in the academic year 2016-17, when the documents on record clearly show that the property was sold during the year and the sale consideration received by the assessee, possession handed over, the transfer of property complete and liable to be taxed during the year and as such the order of the Tribunal perverse?

Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo which reads as under: “That the appellant has filed the above appeal challenging the ITAT order. As per the Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 the above matter falls

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9343-DB ITA No. 100022 of 2023

under the Below Monetary Limit, i.e., 2 crore and the tax effect is Rs.1,31,04,039/-. Hence the matter needs to be withdrawn as per the Circular.”

Copy of the circular dated 17.09.2024 of the Central Board of Direct Taxes is enclosed. In the light of the subject matter of the appeal being below monetary limit in terms of the Circular, the proceedings cannot be continued. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed off.

The substantial questions of law raised above are kept open to be adjudicated in appropriate proceedings.

Sd/- (S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE

BVV, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 0

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MS. SAI KIRAN THAKUR

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments